https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251006 Where the exemption language in the pre-amendment and substituted versions of Section 6-B was materially identical, the benefit could not be limited to the post-1.4.2002 period, and the assessee remained entitled to exemption from turnover tax for the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02. The Tribunal's contrary view was set aside on that issue. Because the record did not permit precise identification of taxable and exempt turnover, the remand to the Assessing Authority for fresh computation was justified and was upheld, subject to applying the exemptions recognised by the Court. en-us Thu, 10 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Mar 2016 16:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251006 Where the exemption language in the pre-amendment and substituted versions of Section 6-B was materially identical, the benefit could not be limited to the post-1.4.2002 period, and the assessee remained entitled to exemption from turnover tax for the assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02. The Tribunal's contrary view was set aside on that issue. Because the record did not permit precise identification of taxable and exempt turnover, the remand to the Assessing Authority for fresh computation was justified and was upheld, subject to applying the exemptions recognised by the Court. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 10 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251006